Woodruff wrote:Uh...it seems quite apparent to me that statement means that distinctly remember you supporting the claim of the "flight of the millionaires" if taxes are raised on the rich, and then I asked you if that was accurate.
I've already provided links showing people are leaving the US over taxes. The hypothetical situation of raising the tax rates to 92% on the highest bracket as the means to which sustain current spending levels would lead to a mass exodus of business and individuals seeking an escape to a completely unfeasible tax rate. How can that be proven? Raise the tax to that level and see.
Woodruff wrote: How does that POSSIBLY equate to me saying that it wouldn't be so bad if we raised taxes to the required amounts to keep current spending levels sustainable?
You said this-
Woodruff wrote:First of all, it's certainly "do-able". That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do or that we need to do it, but it's certainly "do-able".
It's not "do-able", it'd be a disaster. My fault, maybe you didn't mean "do-able=not so bad". You should probably be a bit more clear with such statements.....
Woodruff wrote: As far as I can tell, the one has absolutely nothing at all to do with the other. I mean...this seems like gradeschool level reading comprehension to me.
You don't make yourself very clear.
I never used the term "flight of the millionaires". Hell, I started thinking maybe you were taking issue that I would certainly support anyone leaving the US if they so wished. I do. Don't you? If an individual wants to renounce their American citizenship then more power to them. Rich or poor, young or old, man or woman.
Not only that, but if an individual so chose then they should be able to take all their possessions with them as well, which equates to Money. They can take their money with them.
It seemed like you might have issue with that, if someone wished to leave the US because of over taxation that you might think it would be wrong somehow that they could leave
and take all their money with them.
But you certainly wouldn't be so totalitarian would you?
I maintain, and have always maintained that the issue of taxing the rich more is in no way even close to being a solution to the spending problem the US government has. That whole line is just BS used by both parties to get people to take their side politically. Whoring for votes.
Looking at the US budgets, the draw down in Iraq is complete. Did the budget lower any? I mean, if we don't have to spend all that money in Iraq anymore then the budget should reflect that wouldn't you think? It didn't.
All government did was spend that money on something else. There are no cuts. Government spending to try and create jobs in an effort to "grow our way" to prosperity doesn't work. It's all money down the toilet that we and future generations have to pay and it's immoral.
Just like over spending and instead of cutting back decide to work out schemes to take more money from anyone who has any, including the middle class.
The government is taking in over $2trillion a year as it stands now. If they can't make ends meet with that then there is something seriously wrong don't you think?
There are only 5 nations on the entire planet that spend more than $1 trillion+ a year.
There are only 2 nations on the entire planet that spend more than $2 trillion+ a year.
There is only 1 nation that is spending $3trillion+.
The US budget for 2013 is bigger than the combined budgets of Germany, France and China* combined (#'s 3, 4 and 5 on the list of biggest budgets in the world).
*as of 2010
There is surely something wrong and it's not because the US doesn't tax enough. The problem lies squarely on the spending.
